YOU ARE VISITING THE PAGES OF THE U.K. N.R.A. HISTORIC ARMS RESOURCE CENTRE - MINIATURE CALIBRE RIFLES RESEARCH SITE - COPYRIGHT © 2009
SITE MAP * HOME * ENFIELD & TRAINING RIFLES * TARGET RIFLES * SIGHTS * AIMING * TARGETS * LITERATURE * SUB-CALIBRE * SUB-TARGET * MISCELLANEOUS * BIBLIOGRAPHY * CHRONOLOGY * LINKS
YOU
ARE VISITING THE PAGES OF THE U.K. N.R.A. HISTORIC ARMS RESOURCE CENTRE - MINIATURE
CALIBRE RIFLES RESEARCH SITE - COPYRIGHT © 2009
Rifle No.6, .22in.RF
- RHS
Whilst similar in some respects to its predecessor - the .22 RF No.5 Rifle - it differs in many aspects. The action is also modified from that of a No.4 rifle and the bolt body and head are all but identical, but only single-shot configuration has been found so far, with a loading platform in the magazine well. The fore-end woodwork is deeper below the receiver and fractionally shorter in front of the barrel band. This, and the fact that the barrel is 3.5" longer than that of the No.5, gives a hint that this rifle is destined to lead to the No.8 rifle with its barrel length of 23.2".
For comparison, see collective images of the bolts for the Rifles Nos. 5, 7 (British), 8 & 9.
Rifle No.6, .22in.RF - LHS
No.6
................................
No.5
The rear-sight itself is yet another special design and, unlike the .22RF No.5 rear-sight, does not use a modified No.4 leaf.
... 
...
.....No.5 rifle
There are those Enfield historians who consider that the designation 'No.6' given to this model of the Birmingham Small Arms Company's .22in. RF training rifle series was an error in nomenclature made at the time the rifle was produced. However, the fact that the Australian version of the No. 5 "Jungle Carbine" , trialled around two years earlier, was also given the number "6" ( initially they were known as the 'Lightened Pattern' rifles) is not really good reason to draw this conclusion. When the B.S.A Co. was prototyping the variously proposed designs of .22 training rifles, first "off the blocks" was the conversion of the Rifle No.4. The three or so rifles built were prominently marked on the LHS of the action body
THE BIRMINGHAM SMALL ARMS CO. LTD.
.......................ENGLANDNo.4 RIFLE
CARTRIDGE .22 LONG RIFLE
The subsequent carbine version , the Rifle .22RF No.5, was marked identically except for the transposition of the number "4" for "5".
Consecutive .22 series rifle's numbering was nothing new. Indeed, such nomenclature was used for the miniature calibre conversion of the Lee-Enfield No.1 series of rifles ( The S.M.L.E.) when its .22RF training rifle conversion became the Rifle No.2. This could perhaps have been considered to set a precedent for future training rifles, and it it was almost certainly taken into consideration by B.S.A., who probably only used the notations 4 and 5, as indicated above, on their prototype and trials rifles to illustrate which full-bore service rifles they were intended to represent. With rifle numbers running from the early 20th. Century as 1, 2, 3 ( Rifle No.3 being the Pattern '14), 4 and 5, the next available number was 6. The fact that this number had been afforded to the Australian carbine conversion of the No.1 Rifle, was probably discounted, since that rifle was itself only a trials rifle which was already known not to be going into production for general issue. At the time, the .22 No.6 would anyway have been readily distinguishable and, ironically also was superceded in design by its development into the upcoming Rifle No.8, The No.8 had already been preceded by the Rifle No.7 - put into production for the Royal Air Force. There then followed the last of the so numbered Lee-Enfield series, the Rifle N.9 for the Royal Navy - unexpectedly generally know as the "No.9".
It seems that the .22 Rifle No.6 could quite reasonably have been given a follow-on model number from the .22RF Rifle No.2, with the Rifles Nos. 3,4, & 5 being the intermediate full-bore Service weapons. With no subsequent .303" rifles going into production, The numbers 6, 7 and 8 would have naturally fallen to the ensuing .22RF training rifles.
e, with a heavily modified action to take a solid over-action mounting block to carry the new fixed target rear-sight, and further modified fore-end woodwork .................................when the numbering of the .22in.RF No.5 service trials training rifle had been paralleled with that of its full-bore .303in. centre-fire sibling. Whilst originally not specifically annotated such, this rifle certainly became known, within BSA and external circles, as the .22 No.5 ; nobody appears to have argued with that, although it occurred at almost the same time as the Australian No.6 was trialled and two years before the next number in the series was allotted by BSA to their nearest equivalent follow-on design. This model numbering series for the small-bore training rifles was, of course, continued through to the Royal Air Force's No.7 - 22in. RF version of the No.4 rifle, the No.8 purpose designed service training rifle (of which the .22 No.6 was the precursor), and the final No.9 - .22in. RF conversion of the No.4 by Parker-Hale for the Royal Navy. Coincidentally, three of the early prototype .22in. RF conversions of the No.4 long rifle by BSA were sold as three lots at auction when the BSA collection was broken up in 1971. These were originally perceived as the prototypes to the No.7 production rifle, and it is believed that, in fact, there was a batch of at least five made by BSA . All of these are marked up on the LHS of the receiver body - "BIRMINGHAM SMALL ARMS" - "ENGLAND" - "No.4 RIFLE" - "CARTRIDGE .22 LONG RIFLE". Even the "Pattern Room Collection" does not include one of these rifles. At least one seen of the batch carries the struck designation "No.5" on the left hand side of the butt socket; however, another in the 3 lots sold was struck with "No.3", suggesting that the prototypes were serially numbered in this unusual way. An example carrying "No.5" is illustrated in Ian Skennerton's well known and comprehensive " Lee-Enfield Story". Another carrying that same number ( or more probably it is the same rifle) is currently in the hands of a U.K. collector. The late Herbie Woodend - stalwart guardian of the Pattern Room collection - based his estimate of the minimum quantity of these rifles upon information obtained when they were catalogued for the auction; and the fact that "5" was the highest number actually seen. It could otherwise not unreasonably have been suspected that the designation was intended as a Rifle number rather than a Serial number, since using the prefix "No." is a quite unusual way for BSA to have marked a serial number. That situation may, perhaps, otherwise have put the 'cat
The one hundred .22in. RF No.5 trials rifles are known, as well having been issued to the military, to have been offered, in small numbers, to the Society of Miniature Rifle Clubs (S.M.R.C.) for trialling by civilian shooters in selected clubs. The fact that they may not all have been returned, or that some were subsequently sold off, is probably illustrated by the presence of a small number still
The target-shooting sling fitment is indicative of the rifle's probable use for that purpose, at least in its later incarnation
The .22in.RF No.6 rifle enjoyed a similar, but rather more restricted, test in civilian hands when, at the main open meetings of the S.M.R.C. in the Summer of 1946 Brigadier Barlow supervised the issue of a few of these rifles for use in two major S.M.R.C. competitions. These events were the 'Scottish' in Edinburgh and the 'British National' at Ham and Petersham. The report in the Autumn Rifleman ( Journal of the S.M.R.C.) reads:
"Brigadier Barlow ( J.A. Barlow Jnr.; author of 'The Elements of Rifle Shooting' Editions 1932 - 1941: Ed.) authorised the loan of the War Office new prototype rifles, known as the No.6. These were used only for competitions at 100 yards range. At Edinburgh the best single shoot was a 99 by D. Harkness, whilst at Ham a more serious single entry triple 100 yards shoot was staged with a £20 prize list. This resulted in a top score of 294 being duplicated by Messrs. M. Bergson of Bradford and D. McGillivray of Glasgow to divide the first and second prizes. Following these there were two scores of 293, two scores of 292, and five scores of 291 to take prizes. The rifle was generally admired and the criticism was constructive The main question was how soon can we hope for production".
The journal "The Rifleman" is today still the prime means of dissemination of all matters relating to the latter day National Small-bore Rifle Association.
Rifle No.6 , .303in.CF
There was also an Indian - Ishapore Rifle Factory - involvement in the No.6 genre development of an S.M.L.E. based carbine, considered of possible practical use in that environment. This rifle is not represented on this page.
Click here for Chronology of Enfield genre Training Rifles, Adapters & Cartridges
Where might the small-bore rifle have fitted into the British, Commonwealth and allied Service rifle scene if the second World War had continued? Well, such rifles had already been issued to personnel who had been chosen as would-be members of the British resistance in the event of a successful German invasion. These home-guard "guerrilla" style resistance units were intended to create havoc amongst a German occupying force by selecting important TARGETS and eliminating them with a significant degree of stealth. DeLisle even designed and prototyped a small-bore version of his silenced SMLE based carbine for the British Special Forces. Additionally, some rifles issued at home are believed to have perhaps been .22RF versions of the No.4T sniper rifle. Such rifles do exist, and were used Post-War for sniper training and stored at Warminster. Their whereabouts now are unknown - unless you know better?
" The outstanding troops on Tarawa were our scout-sniper platoons.
These were made up of expert riflemen, expert scouts, working in carefully
organized, carefully trained teams. They were armed with Marine sniper rifles
; Springfields, with telescope sights. Those scopes might surprise you.
Lots of them were long, target-type, eight-power instruments, with wide
fields. Some were hunting scopes. In either case they were damned effective
! Those boys didn't waste a lot of ammunition ; they held and squeezed.
When they fired, Jap rifles stopped cracking. That's better, even, than
scoring a V-on the range ! But scoring Vs on the range is the way to learn
to do it!: " There has been a lot of discussion, pro and con, about
our carbine. In my opinion it's a good weapon for the use for which it is
intended. It can't replace the rifle ; it hasn't the long-range accuracy,'nor
the penetration. But it's fast handling, and it will get a bullet into a
Jap in a hurry, at close ranges. That counts, in close fighting.
" I don't think much of the carbine as an officer's weapon. I don't think an officer needs a weapon, other than a strictly self-defence weapon. His job is to command. When he starts showing the boys how well he can shoot, his efficiency as a commander suffers.
" I'd say, arm officers with pistols. Other men whose basic weapon is not the rifle might better be armed with pistols, too ; such men as machine gunners. A machine gunner has a load to carry. Sling a rifle or a carbine over his shoulder and it handicaps him in the transportation and handling of his basic weapon. When the going gets tough he's apt to discard that extra burden. The pistol isn't in his way, yet it's there when he needs it. It would be even better if the pistol were carried in a Shoulder holster. You get in pretty deep sometimes in the jungle ; it's good to have your equipment high up on your person. Ay and out of the way. "Any weapon that will kill that fits a specific need is valuable. I can see plenty of places where the .22 calibre rifle could be used very effectively in jungle fighting, as a sniper's weapon. Ranges aren't apt to be long, in the jungle, and for those ranges the .22 scope-sighted would be superlatively accurate. It makes little flash, little noise. A sniper armed with it would be hard to locate. And it would do the job. I've heard, unofficially, that one of my junior officers killed a Jap on Tulagi with a Colt Woodsman. It doesn't surprise me in the least."
"The Jap, he's no superman by any means. He's no better woodsman than
our men, except when he's been trained longer ; and he isn't even potentially
as good a rifleman.
" That's bad- for him, because the individual rifleman is the back-
bone of every army. Everything else - the tanks, the planes, the artillery,
even the Navy - are supporting arms to back up or pave the way for the man
with the rifle : the man who goes in on his own two feet, to take and hold
the ground.
" It is rifle fire that ultimately takes ground, and it is rifle fire
that holds it after it's taken, by throwing back enemy counter-attack. The
man with the rifle is the man who wins wars ; and accurate fire from individual
riflemen is the most effective factor on any battlefield. We've proved that,
on Guadalcanal, at 'the Ridge', at Tulagi, at Tarawa, and everywhere we've
gone into action, in this war and in wars past.
., " Lots of people have wrong ideas about training men for combat
shooting. They stress fire power above accuracy, and they look for some
short cut by which they teach men to be good combat shooters without teaching
them the good old fundamentals of basic marksmanship - to hold and squeeze
and hit TARGETS
at known ranges. In my .opinion that's wrong. Fire power
is important, but it is effective only in so far as it is accurate - and
the more accurate it is, the less fire that's needed. Teach basic marksmanship
first. Given that, a man can devote his whole mind to the meeting of combat
conditions without being in doubt of his ability to kill his enemy, once
the enemy is met.
" Teach target marksmanship at known ranges first. Then teach the
man to estimate his own ranges. Teach him to shoot at indistinct TARGETS
,
at moving TARGETS
. Teach him to scout: to take cover properly, to move
properly, to use his eyes to see before being seen. Teach him then to
work as a part of a team : to support his teammates and to make use of
the support they give him. But, above all else, give him a knowledge of
and a confidence in his weapon and in his ability to use it ! Given that,
he'll learn the other things quickly. Lacking that, a man goes into battle
mentally unarmed. His weapons are small comfort to him because he has
no faith in them.He is handicapped, because he isn't sure what he can
do when he meets the enemy. Give him confidence in his gun and his ability
to use it, and he can devote his efforts to taking care of himself and
making contact with the enemy, knowing that when that contact is made,
he can make the most of it.
"Too, having faith in his weapons, a man will take care of those weapons.
Lacking faith in them, he takes poor care of them, with the frequent result
that they don't function properly when he needs them. We saw plenty of that
in the Islands. Mud and salt water and coral sand don't improve automatic
and semi-automatic weapons, and unless a man loves and trusts his weapons,
when he's dog-weary he's apt not to. bother to clean them. Give him supreme
confidence in that gun as the thing that will stand between him and death,
and he'll clean it ! He'll clean it first, and worry less about his
own ills for having done it.
" Teach him to shoot before he ever goes into the service. Teach him
to shoot again, after he's in. Teach him to shoot, again and again, every
chance you get. Give him refresher courses. ' Frequent application of the
seat of the man to the seat of the saddle' is a good way to make a rider
; frequent practice is the only way to make a good shooter. Teach men to
correct errors made in battle by means of target-range practice, and pretty
soon they'll be using target-range skills in battle. Once you get them doing
that, you've got an army !"
And finally, we copy a letter, following the interview recorded in "The Rifleman", written by Major-General Julian C. Smith, from the Office of the Commanding General, Fleet Marine Forces (U.S.), Pacific, and originally addressed to the "American Rifleman"
Office of the Commanding General,
Fleet Marine Forces, Pacific.
Editor,
I was talking to Colonel Murray, who commanded a battalion of the Sixth
Marines at Tarawa and Saipan. He also fought at Guadalcanal, and was wounded
at Saipan. I asked him what training he would stress for his battalion to
prepare it for the next battle. We have so many weapons in an infantry battalion
nowadays that I was really curious to get his reaction.
He said," I would spend more time teaching them rifle marksmanship
than anything else."
He found that Japs were very good shots at short, range. He also found that
automatic weapons, such as machine guns and BAR'S,
often fail to hit individuals at 250 yards and beyond, whereas his good
rifle shots could pick them off. He said, "I would like to have my
men all able to pick off individual Japs at about a hundred yards farther
than the Jap riflemen can pick us off."
Murray's battalion cleared up the remainder of Tarawa Atoll after Betio
had been captured. The Japs all withdrew to the northern end
of the atoll and made a final stand. The ranges in the last steps of the
attack were very short and the Japs, who were among the best
trained Japanese troops, were unexpectedly good shots. Quite a number of
our men were shot through the head when they lifted their
heads looking for the enemy. Also, an amazingly large number were shot through
the right arm or shoulder while in the act of throwing
grenades. However, the better shooting of the Marines showed up in the fact
that they buried 156 .Japs, with the loss of about 80 of his own
men killed and wounded.
Major-General JULIAN C. SMITH.
A new book. Rifle Shooting for Cadets, by Lieut.-Colonel E. R. Godfrey,
is published by Messrs. Gale and Polden Ltd. at Is. 8d. post free.
" That every boy in the Empire for the next hundred years should be
a marksman is a form of national insurance we dare not neglect,"
says Colonel Godfrey. He deals with many individual problems in a way
both practical and interesting.
We make no apology for including these, only partially relevant, passages in this page allotted to the British small-bore training carbines of the period. Please draw your own inferences and conclusions. It is not our wish to put words into the mouths of others.
A suitable follow-on read to this page may be found in the article Champions of Civilian Marksmanship - by Philip Bourjaily on the origins of the British miniature rifle clubs relating to the formation of the Society of Miniature Rifle Clubs and Rudyard Kipling's part in the process.